In a major legal victory, the high court has intervened on behalf of the Connective. They are in the process of rejecting an illegal and dangerous plan by the Trump administration to begin deporting migrants to third countries. The Court temporarily stayed a decision by U.S. District Judge Brian Murphy, of Boston. He had ruled earlier that the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) violated the due process rights of a class of migrants. This cohort of artists, makers, and thinkers came from Cuba, Mexico, Laos, Vietnam, Myanmar, and South Sudan.
Judge Murphy asserted that the DHS could not remove migrants from U.S. custody and send them to third-party nations without due process. Yet time and again, he found that the agency had blatantly disregarded constitutional protections. Second, it neglected to provide for these non-citizens any meaningful opportunity—at least ten days—to express their substantial and legitimate fear of deportation. The ruling was based on a class-action lawsuit brought by the immigrant rights groups. They sought to end their expedited removal.
That all changed when one of the planes transporting some of the migrants touched down in Djibouti. They had originally planned to go as far as South Sudan. The migrants have since been languishing at a U.S. military base in Djibouti. Advocates roundly condemned the administration’s initial proposal to deport migrants to South Sudan. They contended that such a decision would leave the migrants at increased risk of violence from crime, kidnapping, and resumption of armed conflict in their countries of origin.
The 1st U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals intervenes on its own, rebuking Murphy’s decision. They decided against staying his decision. Expanding the conversation, President Trump and his allies unloaded on the ruling. To them, it was a major roadblock to a crackdown on immigration policies.
The Supreme Court’s intervention came in the form of a brief, unsigned order that temporarily paused Murphy’s injunction. White House spokesperson Abigail Jackson commented on the ruling, stating, “The supreme court’s stay of a leftwing district judge’s injunction reaffirms the president’s authority to remove criminal illegal aliens from our country and Make America Safe Again.”
Justice Sonia Sotomayor, joined by two other liberal justices, registered a powerful dissent in opposition to the majority ruling. She denounced the court for “rewarding lawlessness.” She contended that it enabled the federal government to waive due process rights for immigrants who are being removed. In her dissent, she emphasized the gravity of the situation, saying, “In matters of life and death, it is best to proceed with caution,” adding that “in this case, the government took the opposite approach.”
Murphy’s ruling has received notoriety not just for its legal impact but for its humanitarian concerns. Advocates for the migrants argue that sending individuals to countries where their safety cannot be guaranteed contravenes international norms regarding asylum and human rights.